We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Tougher stance on competition infringements from the CMA
BlogPublic Law

When the old Office of Fair Trading was reinvented as the Competition & Markets Authority (CMA) some thought there would be little change in the new regulator’s attitude to competition law enforcement. However it is now quite clear that the new body is taking a far tougher stance on price-fixing.

Two recent cases focus on a form of vertical price fixing called resale price maintenance (“RPM”). RPM is a system whereby the manufacturer of goods (or the provider of services) stipulates the minimum price at which a distributor can resell the goods (or services). The harm to consumers is obviously that the distributor cannot discount on certain products. This practice has come under increasing focus recently as so many goods are resold over the internet.

We blogged previously on the statement of objections issued by the CMA in these cases in February. Both cases related to restrictions on the resale of goods online. Companies will now need to tread very carefully ensuring they do no more than simply recommend resale prices to their distributors. If the ultimate control of downstream pricing is a serious need for some companies, they will need to go down the route of having agency agreements, although that brings in turn the prospect of compensation on termination of agency arrangements.

The CMA has been clear that minimum recommended prices accompanied by threats of delayed supply or other sanctions will amount to unlawful RPM.

The CMA has also issued a Statement of Objections to suppliers of galvanised steel tanks. This appears to relate to the less than full disclosure to the CMA at the time of their initial investigation into this sector.

Hence it has never been more important for companies to update their compliance programmes to ensure no price fixing provisions have slipped their way into their current commercial arrangements.

Compare jurisdictions: Merger Control

In common with many in-house lawyers, I have limited access to (and a limited budget for) resources and rely on receiving know-how from friends and contacts in private practice. Lexology is great as it provides a daily email with the headlines in all the areas of law that I am interested in (which are all relevant to me, as I was able to choose which areas I was interested in at registration), with links to articles from a wide variety of sources.

I tend to scroll through the daily email when I am having my lunch, reading the headlines and descriptions of the articles, and click on any items that are of interest to me - that way, I feel like I am kept 'in the loop' with legal developments.

In addition to the daily email, I find the articles themselves very helpful - they set out the legal principle but most importantly, they 'boil it down' to the practical implications. When I am doing legal research, I also find the archive search function very helpful.

I have recommended the service to quite a few friends who have also found it very helpful."